GCVE Workshop - 22 September 2026 (14:00-18:00), Luxembourg Before The Vulnopticon Conference - Registration

GHSA-XW8C-RRVX-F7XQ

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-05-05 22:17 – Updated: 2026-05-15 23:50
VLAI
Summary
ciguard: SCA HTTP client reads response body without size cap
Details

Summary

Both SCA HTTP clients (src/ciguard/analyzer/sca/osv.py and src/ciguard/analyzer/sca/endoflife.py) call payload = json.loads(resp.read().decode('utf-8')) without a maximum-bytes cap. A hostile or compromised endoflife.date / OSV.dev (or a successful TLS MITM) could return a multi-GB response, exhausting the ciguard process's memory.

Threat scenario

ciguard process memory exhaustion → OOM kill or system swap thrash. Realistic when ciguard runs in CI with a limited memory budget (typical: 4-8 GB). No data integrity or confidentiality impact.

Realism caveat: both URLs are hardcoded HTTPS, so this is a low-realism threat (HTTPS prevents MITM unless the attacker controls a trusted CA or hijacks DNS in a way that doesn't trigger cert validation). The unbounded read is structural defence-in-depth, not a directly exploitable bug today.

Patch

  • New MAX_RESPONSE_BYTES = 5 * 1024 * 1024 (5 MB) constant in both modules.
  • body = resp.read(MAX_RESPONSE_BYTES + 1) with overflow check returns None (caller falls back to stale cache).
  • 3 regression tests in tests/test_sca_rules.py::TestSCAResponseSizeCap.

Discovery

Found during ciguard's first self-conducted pentest cycle, 2026-04-26.

CVSS Scoring

  • CVSS v3.1: CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L — 3.7 (Low)
  • CVSS v4.0: CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N — first.org calc 3.1 (Low); GitHub's calc 6.3 (Medium). Vector is correct — choosing v3.1 as the structured score keeps the consistent Low rating across consumers.

Reproduction

Monkey-patch urllib.request.urlopen to return a fake 50 MB response; observe memory growth before/after the call. Pre-fix: process memory grows by ~50 MB. Post-fix: _fetch returns None, memory growth bounded to MAX_RESPONSE_BYTES.

References

  • Fix released in v0.8.2
  • CI regression gate added in v0.8.3
  • https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-44219
Severity
3.7 (Low)
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
6.3 (Medium)
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "database_specific": {
        "last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 0.8.1"
      },
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "PyPI",
        "name": "ciguard"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "0.6.0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "0.8.2"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2026-44219"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-770"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": true,
    "github_reviewed_at": "2026-05-05T22:17:43Z",
    "nvd_published_at": "2026-05-12T20:16:42Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "## Summary\n\nBoth SCA HTTP clients (`src/ciguard/analyzer/sca/osv.py` and `src/ciguard/analyzer/sca/endoflife.py`) call `payload = json.loads(resp.read().decode(\u0027utf-8\u0027))` without a maximum-bytes cap. A hostile or compromised endoflife.date / OSV.dev (or a successful TLS MITM) could return a multi-GB response, exhausting the ciguard process\u0027s memory.\n\n## Threat scenario\n\nciguard process memory exhaustion \u2192 OOM kill or system swap thrash. Realistic when ciguard runs in CI with a limited memory budget (typical: 4-8 GB). No data integrity or confidentiality impact.\n\n**Realism caveat:** both URLs are hardcoded HTTPS, so this is a low-realism threat (HTTPS prevents MITM unless the attacker controls a trusted CA or hijacks DNS in a way that doesn\u0027t trigger cert validation). The unbounded read is structural defence-in-depth, not a directly exploitable bug today.\n\n## Patch\n\n- New `MAX_RESPONSE_BYTES = 5 * 1024 * 1024` (5 MB) constant in both modules.\n- `body = resp.read(MAX_RESPONSE_BYTES + 1)` with overflow check returns `None` (caller falls back to stale cache).\n- 3 regression tests in `tests/test_sca_rules.py::TestSCAResponseSizeCap`.\n\n## Discovery\n\nFound during ciguard\u0027s first self-conducted pentest cycle, 2026-04-26.\n\n## CVSS Scoring\n\n- CVSS v3.1: `CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L` \u2014 3.7 (Low)\n- CVSS v4.0: `CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N` \u2014 first.org calc 3.1 (Low); GitHub\u0027s calc 6.3 (Medium). Vector is correct \u2014 choosing v3.1 as the structured score keeps the consistent Low rating across consumers.\n\n## Reproduction\n\nMonkey-patch `urllib.request.urlopen` to return a fake 50 MB response; observe memory growth before/after the call. Pre-fix: process memory grows by ~50 MB. Post-fix: `_fetch` returns `None`, memory growth bounded to MAX_RESPONSE_BYTES.\n\n## References\n\n- Fix released in [v0.8.2](https://github.com/Jo-Jo98/ciguard/releases/tag/v0.8.2)\n- CI regression gate added in [v0.8.3](https://github.com/Jo-Jo98/ciguard/releases/tag/v0.8.3)\n- https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-44219",
  "id": "GHSA-xw8c-rrvx-f7xq",
  "modified": "2026-05-15T23:50:38Z",
  "published": "2026-05-05T22:17:43Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/Jo-Jo98/ciguard/security/advisories/GHSA-xw8c-rrvx-f7xq"
    },
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-44219"
    },
    {
      "type": "PACKAGE",
      "url": "https://github.com/Jo-Jo98/ciguard"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/Jo-Jo98/ciguard/releases/tag/v0.8.2"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/Jo-Jo98/ciguard/releases/tag/v0.8.3"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    },
    {
      "score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V4"
    }
  ],
  "summary": "ciguard: SCA HTTP client reads response body without size cap"
}



Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.





Forecast uses a logistic model when the trend is rising, or an exponential decay model when the trend is falling. Fitted via linearized least squares.

Sightings

Author Source Type Date Other

Nomenclature

  • Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
  • Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
  • Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
  • Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
  • Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.


Detection rules are retrieved from Rulezet.


Related by attack behaviour

Vulnerabilities whose description is nearest to this one in the vector space of the CIRCL/vulnerability-attack-technique-biencoder model. This is a similarity search over the bi-encoder space (plain cosine), not a classification, and it has no measured accuracy.